RAA Helicopter?

[jguscott]

Does anyone know if there are any Helicopters approved by RAA in Australia? EG Rotorway...

 

 

[Guest brentc]

Not yet. It may be coming, but someone needs to raise it with RA-Aus. There are people at the high levels of RA-Aus that are interested in the concept so it wouldn't be beating a dead horse as they say.

 

The Robinson 22 would fit in nicely at 622kg's approx MTOW when we finally get 760kg's and there's a few other types out there to get excited over that fit too.

 

Obviously a training syllabus and the appropriate amendments would need to be made so I would think that it would take a while.

 

 

[Guest Brett Campany]

I'll be watching this space then!

 

 

[Mick]

So they might meet the new weight limits, but what about stall speeds???

 

:hittinghead:

 

 

[guerrilla1]

any update on this?

 

 

[facthunter]

Thread dredge... 9 years ago.. Helicopters.. They're simple enough. NOT.. Nev

 

 

[guerrilla1]

Thread dredge... 9 years ago.. Helicopters.. They're simple enough. NOT.. Nev

wasn't a deliberate thread dredge. came up in a google search on the topic. (edited...mod)

 

Helicopters aren't simple, at all. But my question wasn't as to their technicality, but whether anyone was aware of any updates on the subject of light helicopters coming under RAAus.

 

(edit...Mod)

 

 

[M61A1]

No change yet... the best way to get a change might be to grab the wheelbarrow and push it yourself.

 

I looked over a nice little Cicare a while ago for a guy who just bought it, 912 powered, still had to be VH registered and fully licenced to be allowed to fly it.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Gyrocopter is what you are looking for

 

 

[guerrilla1]

M61A1, I think you’re right. Challenge accepted. I wonder how many RAAus pilots would consider rotor conversion if happened.

 

I’m curious because I like the Mosquito XET, and upcoming Afalina.

 

@Tornado... Hell no. Would never leave the ground in one, nor chute, nor hang glider. I understand how they all work... but can’t bring myself to do it. Can’t skydive either. Fkn weird I know.

 

 

[M61A1]

I would love to convert, but the sheer cost of GA heli world is downright scary.

 

 

[Jaba-who]

I would love to convert, but the sheer cost of GA heli world is downright scary.

Yep.

 

A boat is a hole in the water you throw money into.

 

A plane is a hole in the air you throw money into.

 

A helicopter is a hole in the air that actively sucks the money out of your pockets.

 

 

[guerrilla1]

@Jaba & M61A1,

 

If I start to motivate the process through RAAus, would either be interested in helping gathering names for a petition.

 

I can draft documents for RAAus based on American and European standards/SOPs, and will happily be the driving force. But would much appreciate any support in spreading word and getting contact lists of those interested etc. or if you know anyone who can/will?

 

 

[facthunter]

They have their specialised uses. The original AUF/ RAAus theme was simple affordable and safe flying. I don't mind multi engines either but they are out, so are jets, IFR, Night VMC, high stall speed & more than 2 occupants. What you gain in exchange is reduced cost/complexity which I hope will be given due attention in the "NEW GA" we seem to be heading towards. Nev

 

 

[guerrilla1]

They have their specialised uses. The original AUF/ RAAus theme was simple affordable and safe flying. I don't mind multi engines either but they are out, so are jets, IFR, Night VMC, high stall speed & more than 2 occupants. What you gain in exchange is reduced cost/complexity which I hope will be given due attention in the "NEW GA" we seem to be heading towards. Nev

I agree with that.

 

I see GA has this RPL for (correct me if I’m wrong) 1300kg MTOW. I think some features of aircraft in that class are too much to handle for a lot of “recreational” pilots given the level of instruction required to fly under RAAus. But it would be nice to see C140/150’s and some small heli’s under RAA, with IFR or at least N-VFR and retracts.

 

 

[facthunter]

it's all in the melting pot at the moment. Be a clever person who accurately predicts where it will end up. Nev

 

 

[Jaba-who]

Nope.

 

The RAAus is already trying to add stuff that will undoubtedly have bad backlash. I see this is going to end with a lot of unhappy pilots criticizing RAAus and forming a back to basics break away (with wanting the minimal rules they now enjoy).

 

Every one of the already wanted extras is available in another field of aviation - namely GA (at PPL or RPL level). CASA have been obvious in their actions if not their statements that they want people to who want more to go to GA and that for those who stay in RAAus - they wish to screw them down tighter.

 

WRT the extras - They all have enough difference and complexity in them that in the unlikely event that CASA were to agree to any of them, CASA would also say "We will allow your XXXXX desire but to get it we are adding the same requirements in medicals, training, maintenance etc that applies to the PPL/RPL pilot and aircraft in order to exercise those same privileges.

 

CASA is not in the business of relaxing anything. As proved by their intransigence on the medicals front - despite contrary evidence from all over the world. Australia is "different" and requires different (ie more restrictive) rules.

 

They have already been whittling away at the experimental GA aircraft side for several years, turning that back to as close as they can to certified GA. Builder maintenance is now increasingly restricted compared to what it was when I built my J430.

 

So no don't go there - RAAus already has enough on their plate.

 

 

[guerrilla1]

@Jaba-who i agree completely, with the exception of the acceptance of helicopters which meet the MTOW of current RAAus limits. Having a cheaper way to get into rotors such as the Mosquito, Mini 500 and Rotorway would be online with recreational flying.

 

In saying that, I’m well aware that that is my opinion, and not necessarily shared by the majority.

 

Just looking for a gauged response. I have at least now got a clear answer to my original question as to an update on the situation

[fly_tornado]

by the time you get RAA and CASA to move you'll be too old to fly a helo, just bite the bullet and buy a gyro

 

 

[Soleair]

The original AUF/ RAAus theme was simple affordable and safe flying. I don't mind multi engines either but they are out, so are jets, IFR,

95:10 does not limit type or number of engines. Provided you build light enough, multi engines & jets are not prohibited. Not sure how the licence rating would work, though. . .

 

Bruce

 

 

[Nobody]

There are a few Amatuer Built Experimental helicopters that have been registered through the SAAA.

 

 

[M61A1]

There are a few Amatuer Built Experimental helicopters that have been registered through the SAAA.

Yes, but getting the licence is nearly as expensive as the machine.

 

95:10 does not limit type or number of engines. Provided you build light enough, multi engines & jets are not prohibited. Not sure how the licence rating would work, though. . .Bruce

95:10 does have a wing loading requirement though.

 

by the time you get RAA and CASA to move you'll be too old to fly a helo, just bite the bullet and buy a gyro

A gyro will never be a substitute for a helicopter. End of story.

 

 

[facthunter]

95.10 is really a concept far away from anything likely to "go" today. You can build a safe easy to manage twin if you go to the trouble but it's not the cheapest (or safest) way to go. Jets are not allowed as far as I can determine. Nev

 

 

[Jaba-who]

95.10 is really a concept far away from anything likely to "go" today. You can build a safe easy to manage twin if you go to the trouble but it's not the cheapest (or safest) way to go. Jets are not allowed as far as I can determine. Nev

Isn't there some further rule somewhere that limits the aircraft to a single? Don't know for sure but vaguely recall that something somewhere says singles.

 

 

[Soleair]

I can find no mention - & therefore, no prohibition - of the number or type of engines. So a replica scale version of an Airbus A380 jet is theoretically possible, within the other constraints of 95:10. And my 95:10 MiniMax "go's" 2 or 3 times a week, Nev.

 

Bruce